BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

127 results for “disallowance”+ Section 153A(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,194Mumbai2,060Chennai616Bangalore584Hyderabad494Jaipur400Pune232Kolkata191Ahmedabad173Indore168Chandigarh167Amritsar130Cochin127Visakhapatnam100Nagpur96Rajkot92Raipur66Karnataka61Allahabad59Surat50Guwahati45Cuttack33Agra33Patna29Jodhpur26Lucknow25Dehradun21Ranchi21Kerala14Telangana5Varanasi4Calcutta3Gauhati2Punjab & Haryana2SC2Orissa1Rajasthan1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 25091Section 153A67Addition to Income50Section 153C31Section 13230Section 12A28Section 143(3)26Section 139(1)26Section 1121Undisclosed Income

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 267/COCH/2021[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

1). It is seen that the department resists any new or subsequent claim in the return filed under section 153A, primarily on the plea that such assessments are for the benefit of the revenue rather than the assessee. The predominant view of the department in this regard is the return filed under section 153A is a consequence of search action

Showing 1–20 of 127 · Page 1 of 7

14
Disallowance13
Search & Seizure8

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 269/COCH/2021[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

1). It is seen that the department resists any new or subsequent claim in the return filed under section 153A, primarily on the plea that such assessments are for the benefit of the revenue rather than the assessee. The predominant view of the department in this regard is the return filed under section 153A is a consequence of search action

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 271/COCH/2021[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

1). It is seen that the department resists any new or subsequent claim in the return filed under section 153A, primarily on the plea that such assessments are for the benefit of the revenue rather than the assessee. The predominant view of the department in this regard is the return filed under section 153A is a consequence of search action

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 270/COCH/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

1). It is seen that the department resists any new or subsequent claim in the return filed under section 153A, primarily on the plea that such assessments are for the benefit of the revenue rather than the assessee. The predominant view of the department in this regard is the return filed under section 153A is a consequence of search action

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 268/COCH/2021[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

1). It is seen that the department resists any new or subsequent claim in the return filed under section 153A, primarily on the plea that such assessments are for the benefit of the revenue rather than the assessee. The predominant view of the department in this regard is the return filed under section 153A is a consequence of search action

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 255/COCH/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

153A of the IT Act. The sections 11 & 12 of the Act nowhere prescribe filing of return by any due date for the assessment years under consideration so as to grant exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Therefore, the findings of the CIT(A) that the assessee having not filed its returns of income within the prescribed time had failed

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 261/COCH/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

153A of the IT Act. The sections 11 & 12 of the Act nowhere prescribe filing of return by any due date for the assessment years under consideration so as to grant exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Therefore, the findings of the CIT(A) that the assessee having not filed its returns of income within the prescribed time had failed

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 257/COCH/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

153A of the IT Act. The sections 11 & 12 of the Act nowhere prescribe filing of return by any due date for the assessment years under consideration so as to grant exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Therefore, the findings of the CIT(A) that the assessee having not filed its returns of income within the prescribed time had failed

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 260/COCH/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

153A of the IT Act. The sections 11 & 12 of the Act nowhere prescribe filing of return by any due date for the assessment years under consideration so as to grant exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Therefore, the findings of the CIT(A) that the assessee having not filed its returns of income within the prescribed time had failed

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 256/COCH/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

153A of the IT Act. The sections 11 & 12 of the Act nowhere prescribe filing of return by any due date for the assessment years under consideration so as to grant exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Therefore, the findings of the CIT(A) that the assessee having not filed its returns of income within the prescribed time had failed

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 258/COCH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

153A of the IT Act. The sections 11 & 12 of the Act nowhere prescribe filing of return by any due date for the assessment years under consideration so as to grant exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Therefore, the findings of the CIT(A) that the assessee having not filed its returns of income within the prescribed time had failed

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 259/COCH/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

153A of the IT Act. The sections 11 & 12 of the Act nowhere prescribe filing of return by any due date for the assessment years under consideration so as to grant exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Therefore, the findings of the CIT(A) that the assessee having not filed its returns of income within the prescribed time had failed

SRI.PELEXY K. VARGHESE,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THE DCIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 274/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

1) of the Act or on account of period of limitation to issue notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act, therefore, no assessment could be framed u/s. 153C of the Act. We find force in the argument of the Ld. AR. The assessment 10 I.T.A. Nos.270 to 276/Coch/2016 or re-assessment proceedings u/s. 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act arises

SRI.PELEXY K. VARGHESE,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THE DCIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 275/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

1) of the Act or on account of period of limitation to issue notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act, therefore, no assessment could be framed u/s. 153C of the Act. We find force in the argument of the Ld. AR. The assessment 10 I.T.A. Nos.270 to 276/Coch/2016 or re-assessment proceedings u/s. 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act arises

SRI.PELEXY K. VARGHESE,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THE DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 270/COCH/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

1) of the Act or on account of period of limitation to issue notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act, therefore, no assessment could be framed u/s. 153C of the Act. We find force in the argument of the Ld. AR. The assessment 10 I.T.A. Nos.270 to 276/Coch/2016 or re-assessment proceedings u/s. 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act arises

SRI.PELEXY K. VARGHESE,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THE DCIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 276/COCH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

1) of the Act or on account of period of limitation to issue notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act, therefore, no assessment could be framed u/s. 153C of the Act. We find force in the argument of the Ld. AR. The assessment 10 I.T.A. Nos.270 to 276/Coch/2016 or re-assessment proceedings u/s. 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act arises

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 601/COCH/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

disallowance made. 10. The Ld.DR relied on the order of CIT(A). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that in the case law relied on by the ld AR Meeta Gutgutia (supra) it is held that – 60. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court also took note of the decision

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 604/COCH/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

disallowance made. 10. The Ld.DR relied on the order of CIT(A). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that in the case law relied on by the ld AR Meeta Gutgutia (supra) it is held that – 60. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court also took note of the decision

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 602/COCH/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

disallowance made. 10. The Ld.DR relied on the order of CIT(A). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that in the case law relied on by the ld AR Meeta Gutgutia (supra) it is held that – 60. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court also took note of the decision

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 605/COCH/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

disallowance made. 10. The Ld.DR relied on the order of CIT(A). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that in the case law relied on by the ld AR Meeta Gutgutia (supra) it is held that – 60. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court also took note of the decision